of my head so don't quote me but toll larry park our budget is $675 from the 2,000 and eight bond and we received a grant for $275,000 for the california resource agency. so that is the bum for that project. for the bay view gateway project, the budget is approximately $3.6 million i believe and for the coper crane and the power removal it's about $660,000. >> okay and so is that for both sides of third street or just the -- just -- well currently, it's just for toll larry park from the 2012 bond, for the

north side between illinois and 23rd street we had one $.5 million proposed for that improvement. >> okay and so most of those project are in the design phase? none the projects from the 2012 are in the design phase but we have done conceptual bureau of landscape architects hands and detail design phase and work and go out to bid in the spring, i believe. >> so when will we have a concept of what is going to be there? we have it today. >> oh, do we for the bay view gateway. >> or for the 2012? whatever we are going to whatever. >> we have for bay view gateway and toll larry park and gateway we have the concept and

i can show then to you here right now if you would like okay. >> so this is the concept for the bay view gateway and again it's location is between third street and illinois street and car go way the concept includes removing a dilapidated whof along the shore line's edge and taking what is currently today just an entirely paved area and creating some landscape areas which are identified in green with the trees creating a pathway that takes takes pedestrians andbicycle chlics in 34 story and context he he them with car go way which, is a natural direction that people would want to go and create a plaza along the water front, with interpretation throughout

the site regarding the site's history and cargo and integrate through the plaza along the water front and along that railings and along creating a plaza calls the green way transition plaza because it's a place people will be traveling down the illinois street and heading towards car go lines and also enjoy the public art on the pier 92 grain silo and is there is a rail track that goes through the middle of the site that runs east and west and so we are consolid dating or down where people can work with the arts enrichment process and

then selecting plant material that is made of coastal california plant material and one of the thing that we a heard from the maritime community is that they wanted to make sure that we balanced this a park that people can enjoy but not a place that attracts a whole a lot of typical recreation because of the freight rail running through it and significant amount of truck traffic that goes to the port's operation and is so we felt that we had come up with a design that balances that and helps create a natural pedestrianian and bicycle movement, provides a safe crossing for the rail tracks and we worked with the fire department to maximize their lazy holds to get maximize access to the public and a whof area that is fenced off that is not attractive that we are

talking about removing and opening up the water to. >> okay and then the clear space, by the firehouse? that is part of reconfiguration of the firehouse least, currently, the firehouse least extends halfway between illinois street and the firehouse and what we are doing is we are pulling that area and relocating it to the south along the freight rail track and then creating a new fence so that they have their parking and storage area there. >> and so it will be on the other side? right so it will not be as visible to the general public and one of the other thing that we are looking at doing and this is depend on the bulletin is on the west side of third street, at arthur and third or continuation of car going you can enjoy the art on

both sides of the street that will be very nice. >> yes and then the other project that is illustrated here on the top and & i apologize it's farrell small its toll lar yeah park which, is compromises because the utilities running under it primarily and you remember in the early early planning face phases of the illinois street bridge they duck taped the creek and it exploded and -- and creek we had to bridge or over it with a 60-inch force main running through the site as well as a private property this the existing shore line in the eastern portion of the park and so working our engining staff we have

developed a solution to bridge a walkway over the force main create a bell evidence deer out into the water so people can potentially fish and enjoy the water front and then bridge back over the land the force main again and make this park ada accessible and there is a lot of heavy growth in the park that make it a harbor for the homeless and makes it uncomfortable for people to visit and we are going to clear much that have landscaping away and use natural native san francisco coastal plant to lament and create a place that we think is more inviting to use, more a traghtive and also, put interpretation again here about the site and possibly the silo art as well. >> thank you and can we go back to crank copark? absolutely. >> love that one. that one.

so i couldn't understand the differences between the initial phase alternate a and phase -- the difference --. >> so the initial so until the process of cost estimating the cost estimators estimatinged the total cost is twie million dollars but they are dealing with drawings that are very conceptual and not a whole a lot different than than general take off and is so when cost estimators look at project those details they put a 50% contingency on those costs right off the path bath and so that puts us at 33 million and top of that another 32% for detail design work the project management the construction management the resident engineer and is all of the permits necessary for it and that puts us at free million dollars and i'm hopeful that, that contingency, we don't need $11 million of tingee but

rather than promising too much to the community, i want to be very conservative and say this is what we are farrell certain we fairly certain we can deliver which, is outlined in yellow and we can bring the cost down and it's a triangular area called the building one 09, four court area and then the next priority is building one 09 which, is a park civilian and park area that is a part of the building that comes back see the triangle in orange? you referred to it as one 09 but it's one ten. yeah the one 09 is the building to the south so one 09 is red and one ten is original orange correct. and that one ten is the building in the middle of that orange triangular area and so we felt the best phasing as

more money becomes available or that contingency number comes down we would add the orange try ainel area and then the next approach would be to deliver building one 09 which may provide a park she'ller off street parking area and if it comes further, we will add the green area the maritime fields and it looks like the colors got a little jumbled because it looking blue to me but it's green. and then . what is phase two? >> phase -- yes it's in the orange but that dynamic may need updating and my apologizeys for

that. as part of the initial phase we can deliver one of the two cranes in slip way four which don't have the fund do both and so there is that light blue which, is in a crane that relocating at the east end of building 49 and that is the third alternate and phase two is the triangle around the building 110. what is alternative a. >> well ant they the different if you cannot fund phase a then it becomes phase two? right. and i may need to revise that slightly but that is the direction that we are headings and it seems to get support and may be they are as confused as you were but --.

>> okay. well, hope ihopefully, we can get as much time as we can with what we have and hope for future funding but thank you so much and this is a great presentation and we are really happy about all of the oche space projects that we are working on and the wonderful park findings. >> actually i had a couple of questions do we have any estimate of the costs you know you showed us the signage but i think that is along the pathway? >> yes the cost that we have for that is $1.1 million for the sign anal. and is that for all of the signage from mission bay-yeah from mission creek to wrecken park and in a way that wrecken park and m ta can take our design and use it for portions that are off of our jurisdiction and. >> and then will there be

other signage off of there and we are trying to dome develop a consistent palette in the blue and green design palettes and we are come up with boaty blocks that we use at hansen parks with all of the seating parks ton and retaining walls and have some consistency on the park sign anal where the name of the park is recessed in the concrete paul wall and so site furnishings as well as benches and water founds and so there is consistency. >> and pathways? not at this time because much of the pathway runs along existing streets and at this time we are not looking at that but pathway materials we have found this new product that we think we will be using in other parks as well and so.

>> and to the point earlier there was a park we went to and there was a park i have got out of town visitor and we want to go to that park. hairing ton. >> i hope you didn't take anyone to crane co, no, harrison park and it's already having the desired effect of becoming a disintegrate nation so thank you. >> item 11 a informational presentation under proposed infrais it true tour financial district over port property. >> good evening commissioners brad ben son special projects

manager elane forbs and i will be (ing this and this is a a port structure financing district and we have been legislationing and sure some time for this and but i wanted to come to the mic first because in 2005 when monique invited me down to the port, we were struggling with the port's capital plan and capital needs we were engaged in a conferring with michael cohen who was then working at the office of economic and workforce development at financing tools that could help us revitalize the water front. and michael cohen mentioned that he was in conversation with david mad way about different option whether redevelopment would be an appropriate tool along the water front or if there was another

option and david mad way who's here, is former general counsel of the san francisco redevelopment agency and now works at shepherdmony and point out an object cures area in the california code and so it was really david's idea that we have been plowing over the last eight years and i want to thank mr. mad way for that brilliant stroke we are the ones who make sense -- david you know the poorliment tree rules better than anyone. come to the mic afterwards so it can be recorded. >> thank you joovment elane knobs port staff and as david

said this is putting the law in place and geek getting the mechanism to secure infrastructure financing proceeds and a lot of credit goes to bran son and many of my preed says cor and is monique moyer that has gotten us to this point and right now we are looking to the establish a policy with the board of supervisors that gives us a -- to support this before looking at any particular project. we have present proposed policy to the capital planning committee on november 19th and we will go back for action this month and we are looking to the bring the city policy to the board of interferes in early 2013 and so as brad said i'll go over the policy and then brad will go over three major projects that we are proposing the use of i f d for. and so the port commission is very well aware

in 1969, we got our 54 piers nine react activated and we have an extraordinarily large deferred maintenance problem in the magnitude of $2.2 million and what the port earned as an enterprise is not enough to deal with the assets and the defined problems and so one of our major strategies that the port has initiated in the last decade is to find other source and is so we can be successful leveraging the important assets for the future and so this chart really shows all of the growth of all of these other source that are helping ut to solve our problems and the joe bonds that we just spoke of have been important for

park improvementings and i s d which, is in the bright blue is a major proposal to help us build critical flay structure for areas that otherwise, we could not afford. and as a commission m o there is an exhibit a in here in your pact that provides much more detail and there is a lot of detail under pinning this expert aba 18 that allowed united states to take the value from the sea walls for the piers a b 1199 that is the pier 70 state chair which allows us to utilize it's city's share of i f d but the state's fair for pier 70 and trust sexual deflation and 330 and two recent pieces for america's cub a b-6 64 and a b

two twoan 599 and brad is much better equipment to answer legislation on this and finances district proceeds are basically tax increpts that is baseline established and growth above that baseline of what pedestrian interest tax and so it's similar to increment financing and these are at the growth and tax of project's cause that otherwise go to the taxing entities pribblely the generally fund and we hold those proceeds to repay the investment and infrastructure. so no, to the proposed policy. there has been a long tradition both in the charter and in the burton act that the harbor fund is a self supporting the port is a self supporting enterprise and the

city obviously, we pay for that was we purchase from the city and we want to maintain a balance so that the 50 city is not subsidizing the hash fund for our activities and the general services that we require from the city and so we have under taken a nexxus analysis in 2004 and eight that looks at the balance of payment and the next is the methodology that ports with long term leases where the tenants pay tax they pay ampleel tax to be provided these services like any other taxpayer and so the nexxus analysis looks at the unleased land and infrastructure on property and compares the cost of services to our work order bundle and that has shown in 2004 and 2,008 that we are in balance and so since our profile proposal something taking least lands and capturing

taxes for city services we are looking to find a new way and methodology to make sure that the city is whole throughout the life of the prompt. it will -- imi'll take a bit more about that but we are looking to mayor sure hat city is net positive from the development project and that we can ensure that over title through a time of flex type of nexxus analysis: so we are proposing to perform an i f d property and establish areas encompassing each project site. consistent with i s d law, the i s d proceeds would be used for these list of uses here pierces piers and sea level rise and typewriterle remediation, hillic rehabilitation and port maritime. so, we are proposing

this criteria for the city as it looks to see the request for i s d is a good purpose as minimum criteria. so, first, the proposed i f d would be on portland. if there is a case of annexing none portland it will be looked at on a case by case analysis and this would be eight washington or c well lot 851 is a good example of this type of situation where there is parcel and annexing into district and schedule is a adopting an infrastructure financing plan and it's a two step process that starts with inferring the district and then chem back with the infrastructure financing plan and actually specific the improvements from that district and priority improvements water

front district, consistent with i f d in the investment would be consistent with the law obviously, the water front plan and our own capital plan and economic benefit we would always produce analysis for the policy makers that show the total tax revenues to the general opportunity fund and other economic development besides board of trustees and that way the city can review the position of general fund in making this contribution and where the state and city -- where there is state and city matching where we can -- secure the state chair for pier 70, we would make it a priority and the amount of allocated would be 65 clients and up to 90 cents in pier 70 and access incementation is the amount not needed from the

district need today pate necessary infrastructure outside of the bonding period of 30 years so from year 30 to year 45 it would be up to policy makers to decide where to allocate those proceeds either back to the city's general fund or to improve the sea wall if the port issues revenue bonds, we would request that service coverage at this point we are not project proposing the issue gets for the disproment that i will describe in just a moment and we will as part of the i f d identifyfunding sowter for maintenance and this is an ongoing concern for the city is the cost of maintenance the pure cost of ownership is not always described up front and so this is an important point for the city. in terms of the port i f d formation, we are -- the city has through resolution

done the infrastructure financing district staff city staff is developing the plans for each project area which will be separate appendixes and we are asking that the d p w and s f p review all of the horizontal extrusive proposal and is third party estimates that were very sure that she is shes have good very muchs prior to city action and we want the capital planning committee do this extrusive make recommendations to the full board for each i f d a pen appendix. now, obviously, this is an he is wees one to prove for the sale scale of these project and to leverage none city resource and is

continue best practices of city participation. so, this is graphic just shows the a investment post the adoption of the water front land use plan and you can see there are seven scene million dollars of new value since 2,000 and that is for the exploretory and at&t park, pier one and disprawn if we have the crews terminal project for one 10 million or $827 million of investments since the adoption of the water front plan. the three project that weave i'll that brad will be talking about in a moment is at a much larger scale in these three proposed project and you will see as you look at the project that there is about 400 and $10 million of planned i f d proceeds for infrastructure costs in this project and so this policy is really going to

attract huge -- a much larger amount of private investment than we have seen since the adoption of the private land units lan and to pay for critical city owned land use structure and with that, brad will talk you through the project. >> thank you elane. and we do think that this is potentially a game changer for the port. i want to make one minor correction. we have not calculated yet the amount of i f d ass that are captured in pier 70 and it can be the location that we capture the tax increment and it could be that these projects will reach a billion dollars of investment from the i f d actual and that is 3 billion in private investment and you plus up to a billion dollar in public

investment. each of the project the term sheets for these projects are expected to be -- by the port commission by 2013 and then off to the board of supervisors for term sheet consideration and possible endorsement and then each of the project would be subject to their own set of transaction document and is so these are proposals only just for the public's benefit. lot 337 and pier 48 in the port's exclusive negotiating agreement with sea wall lot sociabilities affiliated with the san francisco giant, this slide